A proposed constitutional amendment in Kenya to create a new position of Prime Minister has stalled after parliamentary leaders failed to secure the required two-thirds majority in the National Assembly.
The amendment, introduced by members of the ruling Kenya Kwanza coalition in February, sought to restructure the executive by establishing a Prime Minister appointed by the President from among elected members of parliament, who would then oversee day-to-day government operations whereas the President retained ceremonial and strategic authority.
Proponents argued the change would improve governance efficiency and address public demands for power-sharing following the 2022 general election, which saw President William Ruto elected with a narrow margin amid allegations of electoral irregularities that were later dismissed by the Supreme Court.
However, the bill faced immediate opposition from legal experts and civil society groups, who warned it would create dual centers of power, exacerbate political instability, and undermine the 2010 Constitution’s clear separation of powers between the presidency, parliament, and judiciary.
Parliamentary debates revealed deep divisions within the ruling coalition, with some members expressing concern that the amendment could be used to sideline dissenting voices within the party or to accommodate rival political figures ahead of the 2027 elections.
The National Assembly’s Committee on Justice and Legal Affairs held public hearings in March, during which representatives from the Law Society of Kenya and the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights testified that the proposal lacked a clear problem statement and risked reintroducing the kind of executive-legislative conflict that prompted the 2010 constitutional reform in the first place.
Despite multiple attempts to rally support, the amendment failed to reach the 233-vote threshold needed in the 349-member National Assembly during a vote on April 10, falling short by 47 votes.
Speaker of the National Assembly Moses Wetang’ula confirmed the outcome in a parliamentary statement, noting that while the bill could be reintroduced, it would require renewed negotiations and broader consensus to succeed.
As of April 15, no further parliamentary sessions have been scheduled to revisit the proposal, and the Office of the President has not issued any public comment on the matter.
